4 ms·
The comment wasn’t declaring them to be “not-green” because of the mere existence of environmental consequences. It was doing so because of the large magnitude
by mikeash 7y ago
The comment wasn’t declaring them to be “not-green” because of the mere existence of environmental consequences. It was doing so because of the large magnitude of those consequences.
There’s probably a good argument to be made that they’re worth it, but the original statement was fine too.
- WorldMaker 7y ago"Not green by default" might have been a better phrasing? They can still be much more green compared to alternatives. "Green" isn't a binary, and that seems to be the crux of both arguments above.
- AdamJacobMuller 7y ago> large magnitude Large magnitude in proportion to small return.